My post yesterday titled, “Is
The Southern Cross Subversively Promoting Dissidence”, has caused some
angry responses. The editor of The Southern Cross commented on my blog, “Alas, you are adopting a most hostile tone
yourself, thereby helping to turn the Holy Eucharist into a battlefield with
undue aggression. Are you not ashamed of yourself?”
It is interesting how those who criticise
the new Roman Missal always expect that we should see their point of view as a
worthwhile and intelligent contribution to the subject. Their continual
criticism and questioning is always defended as being nothing more than
reasonable healthy debate and of course a wonderful opportunity for catechesis.
Even when there are unsubstantiated accusations
that the new Roman Missal was driven by the “political agenda” of Church
hierarchy, it is considered acceptable for them to make these accusations. In
the same way, criticism of Church hierarchy is defended on the basis of it
being a legitimate response to a hierarchy who is allegedly abusing their
authority.
It is also considered acceptable for a
priest to publicly accuse our bishops of not answering questions and not
acknowledging frustrations.
The newspaper editor defends the contents of
the Southern Cross by stating that, “we
cannot be "consistently" against the new translations of the missal
if the editorials effectively call for obedience and the Busschau articles even
promote them.” The editor also states that he “called for civility in the debate about the missal in my editorials, but I cannot enforce it.”
I don’t think that there can be any doubt
that, despite the editorials and the Chris Busschau articles, that the overwhelming
perception created by the Southern Cross is one of negativity and criticism of
the new Roman Missal. The editor may then argue that the newspaper simply
reflects the views of the majority of its readers, however that is in my
opinion no excuse.
The Southern Cross is not a secular
newspaper. It is a Catholic newspaper, which has an invaluable role to play in
the catechesis of the faithful. The editor cannot permit content, which has
even a remote possibility of causing any confusion or doubt amongst the
faithful, to be printed and sold in church. The editor has no way of
guaranteeing that all readers of his newspaper are able to discern between the true position of the Church on any matter and what is individual opinion. Since the newspaper is Catholic, any
reasonable Catholic person would have every right to expect that the content thereof
will be a completely true reflection of the official position of the Catholic Church!
Sadly, when those, like me, become infuriated at
this constant, almost never ending criticism of the Church and in this instance
the implementation of the new Roman Missal, we end up being accused of turning
“the Holy Eucharist into a battlefield.”
This is of course utter rubbish. These types
of responses are exactly what the feminists groups use when one expresses
opposition to women priests, or when one expresses opposition to abortion. They
brand you as a misogynist. Well, if opposing women priests and abortion now
means that I am a misogynist, then yes, that is exactly what I am. The LGBT
groups have a similar approach. Express your opinion that gay marriage is wrong
and you are branded as a bigot. Again, if being opposed to gay marriage means
that I am a bigot, then yes, I am a bigot.
To accuse me of turning “the Holy Eucharist into a battlefield”
is a disingenuous accusation, similar to the example I gave of the feminists
and the LGBT groups. Let me instead ask the critics of the new Roman Missal:
- What did the Church decide
about the English translation of the Mass?
- Did the Church not revise
the English translation of the Mass?
- Did the Church not decide
to implement this new Roman Missal?
- Who then is causing the
battle?
There can be no battle if we accept the
decision of the Church! Who would we be battling, ourselves?
Is it not in fact you, the critics of the
new Roman Missal, who unceasingly and publicly express your dissatisfaction
with the decision of the Church, who are turning “the Holy Eucharist into a battlefield”? Is it not you, who is in
fact sowing doubt and confusion in the Church? Is it not you, who is in fact misleading
the faithful? Is it not you, who is portraying the Pope and our bishops as
uncaring, insensitive, authoritarian figures? Is it not you, who is accusing
our bishops of showing no appreciation of the pastoral needs of the faithful? Is
it therefore not you, who should in fact be ashamed?
There is nothing whatsoever that is unsound
or wrong with the new Roman Missal, personal sentiments aside. I therefore see
no reason why this debate must continue in this public manner, creating
confusion, stirring up emotions, promoting, however subtly, dissidence. Enough
is enough. I refuse to be intimidated, by these critics, who are blatantly
disobedient to the Church. I will not recant simply to avoid being branded as an uncharitable person. That would create the delusion of charity. True charity demands that I speak up and stop this subversive attack on the Church.
A lady on the Southern Cross website asked
me, while criticising me, whether I was one of those who “pray, pay and obey?” The answer is a big fat very definitely,
absolutely, YES, YES, YES!
I pray
all the time because that is what our Lord Jesus told me to do and because I
need his constant help and guidance. I pray because I am horrified at what I see
happening in our Church.
I pay
with my time, money and whatever other means I have at my disposal that can be
of benefit to the Church.
I obey
with all my heart because the Church was created directly by our Lord Jesus. By
God himself! I obey an institution that our Lord Jesus personally promised to
protect. A promise, which he has kept and which he will always keep because God
does not break his promises! Of that, I am certain!
“And I tell you, you are Peter,
and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades shall not
prevail against it.”[1]
